Marriage is NOT a Constitutional Right!

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Can you back this up with evidence? Humans are both polygamous and monogamous. By nature, we'd have multiple sexual partners to ensure the spreading of our seed. Marriage is a man-made institution and it primarily arises from religion and other means of social control.

As to the OP, this is an issue of disparity; a person's sexual orientation should not disqualify him or her from an institution which he or she would otherwise be able to attend. Letting gays get married will not effect your life, live and let live.

When you can show me historical proof of the first marriage, when it took place, why, etc, then your challenge will hold some merit.

It is an OVERWHELMING consensus that marriage has occurred as far back as humans have recorded things, and before. To say that it has its origins in religion, again, is fallacious, as NO ONE KNOWS the conditions of its origin.

reply to post by sdcigarpig


First sensible argument in this whole thread. No emotion, I like that. Very level headed.
Here is my response: We didn't have these issue prior to legal proceedings. A married couple could and did take care of each other till the end; until Someone challenged that right and it has been a battle since. If we had left it in the hands of the churches and ACKNOWLEGED the authority of Marriage this would be a mute point. However we opened a pandoras box and let the confused and and ever wrong legal system to begin answering the question of "who has the right, the spouse or the family?" SO we had to have laws and a nanny state.
If we had left it alone, the homosexuals would have had a church and take could take care of each other in peace.
ISHMAEL (by QUINN) was right. When gods start messin with stuff they have to continue till its all jacked up.(my paraphrase)

I understand there is no turning back, but people better begin to back off the plate before this whole country implodes

Thanx for a great response, its a first for me on ATS
CHOI

This is such a non issue that it's almost laughable and yet people are so distracted by it. Hey dumb dumbs, while you're bickering over gay marriage, this is what's really happening:

Law would fire sheriffs for defying gun control measures
DHS under fire for buying another 360,000 bullets ‘to save money’

But see, every gay American, even if less than 5% of the population, only cares about gay marriage. On top of that, you have a large portion of the population distracted by this non issue as well. Maybe you shouldn't have to ask permission from Government to wipe your ass in America? But see, you wouldn't have to if the previous generation wasn't stuck bickering over whatever their non issue was while real things were being moved right passed them.

Originally posted by Christian Voice
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Just how in the world do you know it predates prerecorded history if it was prerecorded? Marriage throughout history has been a religious bond. No matter what religion. Even if it were completely untrue about the religious aspect, these homosexuals and the blind supporters of them are asking the government to once again interfere with families. To regulate laws that pertain to couples and families. To come into our lives and regulate. Funny how you only want government intrusion when it suits your agendas. I love my dog and she loves me, under your misdirected direction we should be allowed to get married.
And all of this crap if you dig into it far enough spars from greed. They want to get married so they can have insurance benefits and other monetary benefits. Sad.....

Prerecorded history? What, exactly, is that?

A very small amount of studying texts that are not whitewashed by christianity will show you that, as I have said numerous times, there is NO RECORD of the first marriage. Your claim is based on blind assumption, that has absolutely no evidence to back it up.

Ahhh, I do love the old "marry my dog" argument. Never gets old and tired. If you really are that into your dog, who am I to stop you? I do wonder what it is about your dog that makes you want to marry it, but if that does it for you, as it seems to, then by all means!

Seriously though, it seems (not surprisingly) that most fundies lack an understanding of the term "consent". But, then, history proves that, too.

So, to you it is greed for people to want to be treated equally, to be privy to the same benefits as you? But it is NOT greed for you to want to keep those things just for you and yours? Strange world you live in....

reply to post by resoe26

You're right man.
That's why we need to bring back the multi-wife marriage.
Monday-Jessica
Tuesday-Rachel
Wednesday-Ashley
Thursday-Juanita
Friday-Shantae
Saturday-Mistress
Sunday-Mistress... after church of course.

Oh, it sounds like fun on paper...and has it's moments...but I'll recommend against a multi-woman relationship...more eggshells to walk on...

Originally posted by Cor Leonis
Marriage is a union between a male and a female according to the Word of God, Period! What, do you really want fire?

There is no undeniable proof that God exists. You're also discounting that there are other religions out there besides Christianity and that not everyone believes in a God or religion. Maybe if you keep harping about how you disapprove of gays, I can take an eye for an eye in your own words and claim that I disagree with the concept of following religion and a possibly fictional deity.

Using religion to even debate this issue is absurd. Religion has no place in federal or state level decisions, and never should. If you use religion to back any decisions, you're not only discounting the rights of homosexuals but also the rights of people of other religious denominations by making a decision soley on Christian "values" .

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
reply to post by IknowJack

 

These are the kinds of equality items that should be looked at, beyond the taxes and financial bennifits that comes along with a marriage. There would be both pros and cons to such, and ultimately, has to be thought about, not for the people who are here now, but for those of the future, the next generation and the generations to come.

I agree, that entails a lot of bending of the already placed "common" laws.

Yes marriage could be considered a natural right, but there is a lot of things people have to consider if the appeal goes through. I find many considering the benefits which leads me to believe that most are just after that alone.

On the other side of that there are those who are actually in love with his/her spouse and they want to have lasting marriages. If those laws and benefits are stripped away, no doubt a lot of may suffer from that.

There can be valid arguments from both sides of the appeal, many believe it will change the foundation of our modern society just by changing the characteristics of the family unit.

Originally posted by EL1A5
There can be valid arguments from both sides of the appeal, many believe it will change the foundation of our modern society just by changing the characteristics of the family unit.

Then why haven't there been any problems in the countries that already support gay marriage?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Technically, the next step would be to allow marriage to children. They already can marry children in other countries, just not of the same sex.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Technically, the next step would be to allow marriage to children. They already can marry children in other countries, just not of the same sex.

And then a horse or dog.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Technically, the next step would be to allow marriage to children. They already can marry children in other countries, just not of the same sex.

Children aren't adults and cannot give consent. Ridiculous "next step".

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by resoe26

 

You're right man.
That's why we need to bring back the multi-wife marriage.
Monday-Jessica
Tuesday-Rachel
Wednesday-Ashley
Thursday-Juanita
Friday-Shantae
Saturday-Mistress
Sunday-Mistress... after church of course.

Oh, it sounds like fun on paper...and has it's moments...but I'll recommend against a multi-woman relationship...more eggshells to walk on...

Yeah I bet you're right.
All those emotional creatures congregating amongst one another, forming alliances, forming enemies, gossip, not to mention the aligning menstrual cycles...
Yeah.. One is enough.

There is a point. If gay marriage can be legal, why not polygamy? That would probably be the next logical step. Who here will stand up for polygamy rights?

reply to post by captaintyinknots

that most fundies lack an understanding of the term "consent".

Perhaps so do members of NAMBLA.

It had to be said. Sorry.

Originally posted by Theimp
There is a point. If gay marriage can be legal, why not polygamy? That would probably be the next logical step. Who here will stand up for polygamy rights?

That's illegal. But if they wanted to I don't care.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Perhaps so do members of NAMBLA.

It had to be said. Sorry.

And what does NAMBLA have to do with gay marriage?

Originally posted by Theimp
There is a point. If gay marriage can be legal, why not polygamy? That would probably be the next logical step. Who here will stand up for polygamy rights?

I will.

*sigh*

Why the hell not?

Look, if they are consenting adults, then they should be free to do what they want to do. Churches won't fall. Civilisation won't implode. Some people's heads might explode.

But, *meh*

Like you said, there are bigger problems in the world that what a few want to do.

Like why do I sound so awesome, singing in the shower, but am banned in every karaoke bar within a 100km radius?

reply to post by beezzer


Because you are tone deaf?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Advantage

 

This right here.
This is why I truly do believe that the religious can retain their religious integrity and separateness from government with the definition of and ceremony concerning marriage. The government or state can retain its separateness from religion by offering civil union for homosexual couples. We have 2 documents.. a marriage license purchased from the government and legal contract... and a marriage certificate from a religious ceremony. We CAN keep these separate.. they already are. Churches shouldn't be compelled by any means to perform same sex ceremonies.. but the state should offer a legally binding contract to same sex couples. We're talking federal benefits, IRS, etc.. things that are NOT the domain of the church... or that the religious ceremony has any involvement with. In this manner the church and state are separate. They already are.. which is why I find the whole argument ridiculous.

That still means you are differentiating between policies based on sexual preference, which I am sure would still offend heterosexual couples were the tables reversed. We're talking about LACK of discrimination, not DIPLOMATIC discrimination.

There is a difference.

No, heteros have to have a marriage license as well.. the church ceremony is not a legal contract. I am differentiating between church and state.

SamaraTen,, Why are Greek Gods, or any other BS, and Yours is NOT. If you knew anything about the history of the Jehovah/Yahweh Deity you would know it was a Mountain God to begin with, an EL, thus the El Shaddai, Elohim etc monikers that pepper the Bible. You really need to go back and research where the 'gods' in the Bible came from, and Realize first that Moses was an Initiate of the Egyptian Mysteries,, being he was raised as he was, and then the Sumerian influence that both he and Abraham injected into what would become the Jewish Religion. Your deity sits NO Higher than any other deities no matter how much or loud you scream.

What amazes me, is how you can degrade what Jesus taught in such a flippant fashion because of your FEAR of the different and unknown to you. I put forth my posts in a fashion to try and lets get off of the Religion part and back to what I thought this Thread was about, but you seem to want to linger in the eye for an eye Old Testament folly of thinking Gentiles are required to follow jewish tradition. Which if you are a follower of Jesus, he said not,, (Or at least Paul said not)
As Jesus said, you are good at knowing and repeating the LETTER OF THE LAW, yet are ignorant of the SPIRIT OF THE LAW which is LOVE.
Sorry you missed that in your Sunday School.
Also, even with the most sarcastic remarks I may have made, I never called you a Crack Head or any such derogatory remarks. I didn't even call you a bigot personally, I was speaking in general, now if you recognize your bigotry as such, then good work. If not, it is OK, I still can respect you as a human, which is more than you seem to afford me and others.

Hide behind LOVE,, How does one do that I ask?
Again, have a blessed day, and may the God of Compassion have mercy on your soul and let you find the path to Real Love One day. For Like you quoted, but failed to exhibit, "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Peace to you.

Originally posted by SamaraTen

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
You Obviously didn't look at who Bayard Rustin Was, because, yes he was doing what he did for BOTH,, being Black and GAY,,, Openly then,, you have to be kidding.

So sorry to post anything beneath your level of spirituality and time, I have twisted nothing dear online person, I leave that up to the bigots and fundies. You really reek of FEAR, and I am truly sorry about that for you.
I wish you the best with your smiting attitude, I am sure it has gotten you far in this life.
Again Have a Blessed Day.
Oh By the Way,,, when I was 'Saved" it was because of How the Old Hymn " JUST AS I AM" moved my heart closer to god. You can think what you wish,, God and I are just Fine with WHO I AM,, My deity LOVES UNCONDITIONALLY unlike the being you present.

Originally posted by SamaraTen
reply to post by EarthCitizen23

 

I ignored your post because it wasn't worth my time. The man you referred to was doing his work for blacks not gays. IF you're gonna twist something...make it accurate.

Add: I'll say it to you again, God is not going to change HIS laws because you're gay. You're the one that needs to "change your thinking".

edit on 27-3-2013 by SamaraTen because: (no reason given)

Reek of fear? Well, yaaaaaaah, but it's not of "gay people". I fear what God may do to us (excuse me, to YOU) for your total MOCKERY of HIS word. If anyone is the bigot in all of this, it's you. You're the one with the name calling; spewing your 'greek god' BS. Then, you want to hide behind the word: Love?

4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Get off of the hollywood crack or crystal meth.